# Can someone help me calculate if I am "pot committed" in the following scenario?

Scenario:

Final round of betting, two players left.

Player 1 and Player 2 have each contributed \$38 to the pot.

There is \$102 of 'dead money' from other players in the pot, so there is \$178 in the pot.

Player 1's remaining stack is \$11.

Player 2's remaining stack is \$70.

The action is to Player 2 who bets \$11, forcing Player 1 to fold or go all in.

My question:

What probability of winning does Player 1 need for him to be considered "pot committed"?

Player 1 is facing a bet of \$11 into an existing pot of \$178+\$11 = \$189, so is getting pot odds of 189/11 = 17.18 (so just over 17-1).

To make a call profitable, they therefore need to have the winning hand at least 1/17.18 = 0.058 (5.8%) of the time.

I look forward to finding out where my math is wrong. :)

• I got a chuckle from your last comment :D
– Grinch91
Commented Apr 26, 2017 at 14:47

"Pot committed" happened on the prior bet. On the turn if you call off or bet out 1/3 of your stack then you are pot committed. On the turn (or flop if no turn bet) should have pushed or folded. If the prior bet was \$6 or more then you were pot committed. For sure pot committed if the prior bet was \$11 or more. You got where you are you are 17:1. Call if you think you have a chance. If you are J high on busted draw then fold unless you think it is a stone cold bluff. But a lot of stone cold bluffs beat J high. What is your hand and what is the board? Made hand or draw the prior bet was the decision point.

• Yeah, I guess I'm kind of busted. I wasn't actually talking about poker, but a public spending fiasco, where good money is being thrown after bad. People are obsessing about the "sunk cost" of it all, but it occurred to me that a poker metaphor might help, as it does seem to me that they are behaving as if they are "pot committed", but really aren't. ... That said, both answers above are really helpful. Thanks!
– DIA
Commented Apr 27, 2017 at 14:05